Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) Chairwoman Lai Shin-yuan (賴幸媛) withdrew from the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) shortly after the party’s Central Executive Committee said it would expel her if she did not quit her job within three days. Lai said she would “stay focused on official business, do what she should and remain loyal to the public, her post and to the country.”
She also said she would still strive to carry out her center-left political ideology. Judging from the fact that Lai completely agrees with President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his administration’s China policies and has actively implemented government policy on the deregulation of cross-strait economic exchanges since May 20, the TSU should have expelled her earlier.
Up until recently, the matter had been delayed, leaving a bad impression on the public.
In April, after being appointed MAC chairwoman, Lai announced her support for the so-called “1992 Consensus” and agreed fully with Ma and Vice President Vincent Siew’s (蕭萬長) “no independence, no unification and no use of force” policy. She even said on a number of occasions that there were no differences between her views and the cross-strait policies advocated by Ma and Siew.
Although Lai obtained approval from the TSU to serve as MAC chairwoman, the party did not clarify her remarks at the time. It would therefore be interesting to know whether the TSU has changed its position as Lai’s stance is obviously contradictory to the TSU party’s “Taiwan is an independent, sovereign state” position.
Lai has been the only pan-green official in the Ma administration. Even though she is MAC chairwoman and leans toward Ma and Siew’s cross-strait policies, she does not have any rights to make a decision, and is nothing if not Ma’s tool to relax cross-strait policies.
The Ma administration has been happy to use Lai’s “pro-localization” image to market its no-holds-barred policy deregulation. Ridiculously, Lai thought that “only by putting herself in this thankless frontline position” could she meet her goal of protecting Taiwan’s interests.
How does Lai protect Taiwan’s interests? Let’s look at the important deregulation measures carried out since May 20.
The government has signed deals on weekend direct chartered flights and an increase in the number of Chinese allowed to visit. The restrictions on the “small three links” and Chinese currency exchanges have been lifted. Five Chinese media outlets have set a branch office in Taiwan and the Taiwanese offices of Xinhua news agency and the People’s Daily have restored operations. County commissioners and mayors have been allowed to travel to China. The ratio of fund investments in China to foreign investment has been raised while the cap on China-bound investments have been lifted.
The application process for Chinese professionals visiting Taiwan has become more convenient and quicker.
Policies on Chinese investment in the domestic stock market have been relaxed. The government has tried to push forward the normalization of the “small three links.” The proposal to recognize Chinese educational credentials is still under discussion, but the proposal for Taiwanese businesspeople to serve as members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Local Committees has been halted because of public opposition. All these are what Lai calls serving the interests of Taiwan.
But are these various relaxation measures meant to serve the interests of Taiwan or the interests of Ma and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤)? From what we see now, it is the latter. Since the US financial crisis broke, Lai has helped the Ma administration push forward the policy that Taiwan’s economy must rely on China, despite the fact that the increasing industrial and capital outflows will erode Taiwan’s economy and financial system.
Once a legislator who led the public in protests against Chinese towel imports, Lai now champions cross-strait relations and thinks that the government should never offend China.
Since Lai’s policies are 100 percent in line with Ma and Siew’s and her achievements on cross-strait issues stand out among other ministers, she could follow up on her withdrawal from the TSU by joining the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and continue to serve the Ma administration.
Translated by Ted Yang.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS